It's déjà vu all over again

Bruce Bawer via LGF, today:

The other day, in the wake of my City Journal piece “Heirs to Fortuyn?”, a couple of anti-jihad writers who had not yet rebuked me for my stance on Vlaams Belang finally got around to doing so. Not only did they send me e-mails taking me to task for criticizing VB in that article; one of them also took it upon himself to chew me out for, in his view, admiring Pim Fortuyn too much and Geert Wilders too little. (Never mind that I’ve defended Wilders frequently and that Wilders has blurbed my new book, Surrender.) Wilders, this individual felt compelled to lecture me, is a far greater figure than Fortuyn ever was. Why? Because, he explained, Wilders stands for “Western values,” while Fortuyn stood only for – get ready for this – “Dutch libertinism.”

Yes, “Dutch libertinism.” The words took my breath away. During the last few days (while, as it happened, I was visiting Amsterdam) I haven’t been able to get them out of my mind. For a self-styled anti-jihadist – who, by the way, I first met three years ago at the Pim Fortuyn Memorial Conference in The Hague – to refer in this way to a man who sacrificed his life for human liberty is, in my view, not only incomprehensible but profoundly despicable. This is, after all, precisely the sort of language that Dutch Muslim leaders hurled at Fortuyn during his lifetime. And in the present case the words were plainly aimed not only at Fortuyn but at me – a writer who, like Fortuyn, that great martyr for freedom, is gay.

What the hell, one is entitled to wonder, is going on here? Why has Vlaams Belang, of all things, become a veritable sacred cow for so many anti-jihadist writers? And why does at least one of them now take such a staggeringly contemptuous view of Pim Fortuyn? I can’t honestly say that I understand any of it. But I do know this: when writers who represent themselves as champions of liberty start cozying up to distinctly illiberal parties like Vlaams Belang – and when one of those supposed champions of liberty starts to sound uncomfortably like the Islamist enemies of freedom whom he purports to despise – then there’s something terribly wrong, and genuinely evil, afoot.

LGF Watch, more than three years ago:

Shorter Paul Belien

"The only possible alternative to Islamo-fascism is Christo-fascism."

This piece of lunatic drivel scores extra-high on the Irony-Meter thanks to this bit in its last paragraph:

We have seen the assassinations of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh

Pim Fortuyn was a proud, promiscuous homosexual.

Theo van Gogh despised all religions, and was an ardent admirer of Fortuyn.

But according to Bible-bashers like Belien and his fascist friends, secularism, abortion and "hedonism" (a code word for sexual tolerance) are destroying Europe and paving the way for an Islamist takeover.

I don't think either van Gogh or Fortuyn would agree.

(note: Paul Belien is the publisher of the Brussels Journal, and has close ties to Vlaams Belang.)

More (from us, of course) on Vlaams Belang

Charles Vs. Geert Wilders (and friends)

Wow, Chuckles must be reading my blog since he banned my IP address because this post is almost word for word what I've been saying about the Geert Wilders fiasco:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/32732_Dutch_MP_Barred_from_Entering_Britain/comments/

(You'll probably have to cut and paste that one, I'm pretty sure he's blocked all of my links as well.)
Hat-tip: Jeppo

Dutch MP Barred from Entering Britain

World | Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 3:23:15 pm PST

Anti-Islam Dutch MP Geert Wilders has been barred from entering Britain, after a protest was lodged by Muslim House of Lords member Nazir Ahmed.

Yes, it’s a disgrace. Geert Wilders has the same right to free speech as anyone else, and the government of Britain is demonstrating once again that they’ve completely lost their way in a maze of multicultural contradictions.

However, Wilders himself does not deserve to be called an icon of free speech, since he explicitly wants to ban the Koran and make Islam illegal in Europe; in other words, he wants to take away other people’s freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and that is simply wrong. Book banning is what totalitarians do, not believers in free speech.

Also note that Wilders has recently announced he plans to form an alliance with the neofascist Belgian party Vlaams Belang.

So while I denounce Britain’s decision, I can’t support Wilders either while he maintains these positions and associations. Britain is wrong, and Wilders is also wrong. It’s a bad situation all around.

(Bold my emphasis, and truly, isn't this what I've been busy posting on? Maybe Spencer and Pamela Atlas will get the message now that its on LGF.)

Here's Sharmuta being utterly hilarious:

31 Sharmuta 2/10/09 3:33:43 pm reply quote

When will the Europeans start to take a more comprehensive, intellectual look at American principles? That limiting speech doesn't solve the underlying issues, but only masks them? That continuing with their anti-American sentiments makes it more difficult to consider alternative options to dealing with their issues?

We don't have everything perfect here in America, but what we did get right has allowed bigots to remain on the fringes where they belong, not masking their bigotry and gaining large following that legitimize them.

I know a lot of individual Europeans love America and Americans. What is wrong with the rest of them though? Embrace free speech! Embrace individual rights! And maybe from there some solutions to european issues could be found.

Then what the hell is Little Green Footballs, Sharmuta? Oh, and yes, you are on the fringes. I've seen LGF's Alexa traffic. Continuing:

(emphasis mine)

Now for Charles in comment #54:

Wilders' plans to ally with the VB have been confirmed to me by other sources.

And since Charles can't get enough of his own commentary:

119 Charles 2/10/09 4:58:24 pm reply quote

re: #117 Vik

The way you "defend yourself" against Islam is by using your power of free speech to argue, demonstrate and reveal what you think should be known. Not by banning religion, and taking away the rights of others.

Fascists ban books, and ban religions. Not people who believe in democracy.

Charles, the defender of free speech! As long as it isn't on his blog...um, yeah...

133 Charles 2/10/09 5:31:48 pm reply quote

re: #127 USBeast

Charles, I do not believe there are any "good ideas" regarding the situation in Europe, only ugly choices. I do not like any of them. I have no contact with neo-Nazis, fascists, Creationists, Truthers or Flat Earthers. I am not in a panic about Islam, but I am concerned about the fate of Western Civilization and consider free and open discussion of issues to be one of the bedrocks of that civilization.

If someone has been offended by any of my comments, please understand that no offense was intended.

I'm not offended - it's just that I've heard all of these arguments for compromising principles and hooking up with really bad people because "it's our only choice or we're doomed!" many times before.

I'm still surprised that people will actually argue that we should drop all our integrity and hook up with people who aren't even fit to be spat upon.

Hmmm, wonder who he's talking about here? (cough...Spencer...cough...Pamela)

199 Charles 2/10/09 8:18:54 pm reply quote


Anyone who advocates making Islam illegal or banning the Koran is living in a dream world. It's not going to happen. Ever. By advocating this crap, all you do is make yourself look like a fanatic.

If that's cool with you, then go ahead. Knock yourselves out.

202 Charles 2/10/09 9:11:45 pm reply quote

re: #201 Vik

Expose the imams, prosecute people who commit crimes, and use the military against stateless terrorist groups. We already have the methods in place to combat militant Islam.

You're dreaming if you think this country will criminalize speech. And if it ever does, it won't be a country I want to live in any more.

Chuckles, the problem solver of our century. Then again, he only posted this to anger his enemies and keep his little feud going. More popcorn anyone?

Posted in full here with even more charming comments.

Arf!

While perusing the LGF front page earlier today, our eagle eye noticed that a person referring to him- or herself as "Bottehond" had posted a comment. This piqued our interest, what with "Bottehond" being a Dutch word and all (literal translation: "Bone Dog"), so we did a bit of digging.

And found this -- a pro-Vlaams-Belang article posted on a website to which a person referring to him- or herself as "Bottehond" also contributes.

It's unknown whether these two "Bottehonden" are one and the same, but be that as it may, we thought you might enjoy reading an excerpt, hastily translated from the Dutch, from the aforementioned article:

People of European descent who draw the Celtic cross or have a picture of it are, in [Charles] Johnson's eyes, filthy "racists." People who state that Europe was white and must stay white are, in Johnson's eyes, nothing more and nothing less than direct descendants of Adolf Hitler. People who believe that their fathers and grandfathers were wrong in supporting or ignoring the goals of the aforementioned Adolf Hitler, but who nonetheless honor these fathers and grandfathers because they did what they did for their people, for their religion, for their traditions, for Flemish independence -- that is something Johnson has never heard of, nor does he want to.

Charles Johnson sees the world in black and white; there is only absolute good and absolute evil. Johnson is never wrong and can never treat the enemy of his enemy as a friend. Johnson lives in a country whose original inhabitants were wiped from the map and has no problem with such a scenario repeating itself in other countries. Johnson dislikes symbols, and especially crosses, even though these fit in well with his hatred of Islam. Johnson can't deal with political incorrectness, even though it fits in well with his own form of political correctness. Johnson believes that the entire world should be like his dream vision of the United States: multiracial, but free of Islamists; with freedom of opinion, but not for those who disagree with him; multicultural, but with no room for other modes of thought besides his own economic and ethical liberalism and his atheism.

It goes on for quite a bit, but you get the idea.

Memo to Charles: adding hundreds of new "hatchlings" per day in a desperate attempt to boost your traffic rankings is a swell idea, but do you really know who they are?

Belang and winding road

Those cheeky monkeys over at Sadly, No! are covering the Charles v. Pammy cage match in lavish, spit-take-inducing detail. Absolutely not to be missed.

[UPDATE 10/29 - Okay, this is getting weird.]

[UPDATE 10/30 - Quote of the century "In case you do not read Little Green Footballs, the blog is pro-Muslim, left-wing, politically correct.."]

Memories

Memories
Like the corners of my mind
Misty watercolor memories
Of the way we were
Scattered pictures
Of the smiles we left behind
Smiles we gave to one another
For the way we were

Let's not forget that despite his current worries about Vlaams Belang, Charles Johnson was quite happy to promote them and his 'lizards' were quite clear on defending him from accusations of far-right extremism.